Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Design and evaluation of a DIY construction system for educational robot kits

  • Published:
International Journal of Technology and Design Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Building a robot from scratch in an educational context can be a challenging prospect. While a multitude of projects exist that simplify the electronics and software aspects of a robot, the same cannot be said for construction systems for robotics. In this paper, we present our efforts to create a low-cost do-it-yourself construction system for small robots. We have created three different construction systems (laser-cut screw connectors, printed friction-fit connectors, and printed hybrid connectors) using small aluminium T-slot extrusions, based on prior work done by Industrial Design college students. Eighty-six secondary school students and 35 teachers tested these three systems during a five-day robotics contest where they had to build firefighting robots. Follow-up questionnaires and an expert evaluation were used to measure the usability, affective appraisal and functionality of the three systems in order to determine which system should serve as a basis for further design iterations. Overall, a clear preference was shown for the hybrid system, which relies on its interlocking shape as well as on a screw connection to create robot frames that are both quick to construct and very rigid once assembled. We believe our work represents a solid first step toward an inexpensive, “hackable” construction system for educational robotics.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. http://www.arduino.cc.

  2. http://www.raspberrypi.org.

  3. http://scratch.mit.edu.

  4. http://code.google.com/p/blockly/.

  5. http://bitbeam.org.

  6. http://www.makeblock.cc.

  7. http://www.dwengo.org—A non-profit organisation that promotes science and technology.

  8. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jP-G1OrR5Ng—CErrobotics project documentary.

  9. https://github.com/cesarvandevelde/RobotBlocks.

References

  • Bangor, A., Kortum, P. T., & Miller, J. T. (2008). An empirical evaluation of the system usability scale. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 24(6), 574–594. doi:10.1080/10447310802205776.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benitti, F. B. V. (2012). Exploring the educational potential of robotics in schools: A systematic review. Computers & Education, 58(3), 978–988. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2011.10.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blikstein, P. (2013). Digital fabrication and “making” in education: The democratization of invention. In J. Walter-Herrmann & C. Büching (Eds.), FabLabs: Of machines, makers and inventors. Bielefeld: Transcript Verlag.

  • Brandt, A. M., & Colton, M. B. (2008). Toys in the classroom: LEGO MindStorms as an educational haptics platform. In 2008 symposium on haptic interfaces for virtual environment and teleoperator systems (pp. 389–395). IEEE. doi:10.1109/HAPTICS.2008.4479982.

  • Brooke, J. (1996). SUS-A quick and dirty usability scale. In P. W. Jordan, B. Thomas, B. Weerdmeester & I. L. McClelland (Eds.), Usability evaluation in industry (pp. 189–194). London: CRC Press.

  • Buxton, B. (2010). Sketching user experiences: Getting the design right and the right design: Getting the design right and the right design. Amsterdam: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.

  • Bybee, R. (2000). Achieving technological literacy: A national imperative. The Technology Teacher, 60, 23–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Capraro, R. M., Capraro, M. M., & Morgan, J. R. (2013). STEM project-based learning. Rotterdam: SensePublishers. doi:10.1007/978-94-6209-143-6.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Church, W., Ford, T., Perova, N., & Rogers, C. (2010). Physics with robotics-using LEGO MINDSTORMS in high school education. In Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence Spring Symposium.

  • Desmet, P. M. A., Vastenburg, M. H., Van Bel, D., & Romero, N. (2012). Pick-A-Mood: Development and application of a pictorial mood reporting instrument. In Proceedings of the 8th international design and emotion conference.

  • Fisher, R. (1922). On the interpretation of χ2 from contingency tables, and the calculation of P. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 85(1), 87–94. doi:10.2307/2340521.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fortus, D., & Krajcik, J. (2005). Design-based science and real-world problem-solving. International Journal of Science Education, 27(7), 855–879.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gonzalez-Gomez, J., Valero-Gomez, A., Prieto-Moreno, A., & Abderrahim, M. (2012). A new open source 3D-printable mobile robotic platform for education. In U. Rückert, S. Joaquin, & W. Felix (Eds.), Advances in autonomous mini robots (pp. 49–62). Berlin: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-27482-4.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hake, R. (1998). Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 66(1), 64–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hassenzahl, M., Burmester, M., & Koller, F. (2003). AttrakDiff: Ein Fragebogen zur Messung wahrgenommener hedonischer und pragmatischer Qualität. In G. Szwillus & J. Ziegler (Eds.), Mensch and computer (Vol. 57, pp. 187–196). Wiesbaden: Vieweg + Teubner Verlag. doi:10.1007/978-3-322-80058-9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, J. (2003). Children, robotics, and education. Artificial Life and Robotics, 7(1–2), 16–21. doi:10.1007/BF02480880.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kafai, Y. B., & Resnick, M. (1996). Constructionism in practice: Designing, thinking, and learning in a digital world. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolodner, J., & Camp, P. (2003). Problem-based learning meets case-based reasoning in the middle-school science classroom: Putting learning by design (tm) into practice. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(4), 495–547.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mataric, M. J., Koenig, N. P., & Feil-Seifer, D. (2007). Materials for enabling hands-on robotics and STEM education. In AAAI spring symposium: Semantic scientific knowledge integration (pp. 99–102).

  • McPherson, S. (2014). Strategies and resources for preparing teachers for STEM teaching and learning. In Proceedings of society for information technology and teacher education international conference (pp. 1927–1939).

  • Milto, E., Rogers, C., & Portsmore, M. (2002). Gender differences in confidence levels, group interactions, and feelings about competition in an introductory robotics course. In 32nd annual frontiers in education (Vol. 2, pp. F4C-7–F4C-14). IEEE. doi:10.1109/FIE.2002.1158224.

  • Mondada, F., Bonani, M., Raemy, X., Pugh, J., Cianci, C., Klaptocz, A., et al. (2009). The e-puck, a robot designed for education in engineering. Proceedings of the 9th Conference on Autonomous Robot Systems and Competitions, 1(1), 59–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, R., Thomas, A., & Forbes, J. (2010). Teaching with robots: A service-learning approach to mentor training. In Proceedings of the 41st ACM technical symposium on Computer science education (pp. 172–176).

  • Pack, D., & Avanzato, R. (2004). Fire-fighting mobile robotics and interdisciplinary design-comparative perspectives. IEEE Transactions on Education, 47(3), 369–376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pugh, S. (1991). Total design: Integrated methods for successful product engineering. Wokingham: Addison-Wesley.

  • Ranganathan, P., Schultz, R., & Mardani, M. (2008). Use of LEGO NXT Mindstorms brick in engineering education. In Proceedings of the 2008 ASEE North Midwest Sectional Conference (pp. 17–19).

  • Riojas, M., Lysecky, S., & Rozenblit, J. (2012). Educational technologies for precollege engineering education. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 5(1), 20–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rockland, R., Bloom, D., & Carpinelli, J. (2010). Advancing the “E” in K-12 STEM education. Journal of Technology Studies, 36(1), 53–65.

  • Russel, J. A. (1980). A circumplex model of affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(6), 1161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sabadash, A. (2012). ICT employment statistics in Europe: Measurement methodology.

  • Schmidt, E., & Cohen, J. (2013). The new digital age: Transforming nations, businesses, and our lives. New York: Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stager, G. (2005). Papertian constructionism and the design of productive contexts for learning. In Proceedings of EuroLogo 2005.

  • Törnkvist, S. (1998). Creativity: can it be taught? The case of engineering education. European Journal of Engineering Education, 23(1), 5–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vandevelde, C., Saldien, J., Ciocci, C., & Vanderborght, B. (2013). Overview of technologies for building robots in the classroom. In Proceedings of the 4th international conference on robotics in education.

  • Vastenburg, M., Romero Herrera, N., Van Bel, D., & Desmet, P. (2011). PMRI. In Proceedings of the 2011 annual conference extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems: CHI EA’11 (p. 2155). New York: ACM Press. doi:10.1145/1979742.1979933.

  • Verner, I. M., & Ahlgren, D. J. (2004). Robot contest as a laboratory for experiential engineering education. Journal on Educational Resources in Computing, 4(2), 2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walter-Herrmann, J., & Büching, C. (2013). FabLab: Of machines, makers and inventors. Bielefeld: Transcript Verlag.

  • Williams, K., Igel, I., Poveda, R., Kapila, V., & Iskander, M. (2012). Enriching K-12 science and mathematics education using LEGOs. Advances in Engineering Education, 3(2).

  • Wyffels, F., Bruneel, K., Bertels, P., D’Haene, M., Heirman, W., & Waegeman, T. (2012). A human-friendly way of programming robots. In 5th international workshop on human-friendly robotics, abstracts.

  • Wyffels, F., Hermans, M., & Schrauwen, B. (2010). Building robots as a tool to motivate students into an engineering education. AT&P Journal Plus, 2010(2), 113–116.

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank everyone involved in the Dwengo CErrobotics project. In particular, we would like to thank Juan Pablo Carbajal from Ghent University and Dwengo, who co-organised the project and translated the questionnaires. The CErrobotics project would not have been possible without the support from the Google RISE 2013 program, the “Ministerio de Educación, Ciencia y Tecnología” of the “Gobierno de la province de Salta” and the U.F.I.De.T.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Industrial Systems and Product Design, Ghent University, Graaf Karel de Goedelaan 5, Kortrijk, Belgium

    Cesar Vandevelde, Maria-Cristina Ciocci & Jelle Saldien

  2. Department of Electronics and Information Systems, Ghent University, Sint-Pietersnieuwstraat 41, Ghent, Belgium

    Francis Wyffels

  3. Robotics and Multibody Mechanics, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Pleinlaan 2, Brussels, Belgium

    Bram Vanderborght

Authors
  1. Cesar Vandevelde
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Francis Wyffels
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Maria-Cristina Ciocci
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Bram Vanderborght
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Jelle Saldien
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cesar Vandevelde.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Vandevelde, C., Wyffels, F., Ciocci, MC. et al. Design and evaluation of a DIY construction system for educational robot kits. Int J Technol Des Educ 26, 521–540 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-015-9324-1

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-015-9324-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation